Partly allowed

E.L.Antony v. Shiju and Two Others

Kerala HC8 Jan 2013MACA/612/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed part of the appellant's appeal against the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal award. The Court increased the monthly income and awarded additional compensation for loss of earning, extra nourishment, and loss of amenities, totaling an incremental award of Rs. 11,000.

What did the court decide?

Additional compensation of Rs. 11,000 awarded covering loss of earning, extra nourishment, and loss of amenities with interest.

E.L.Antony Vs Shiju and Two Others — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013/18TH POUSHA 1934

¶5

MACA.No. 612 of 2011 ( ) -----------------------OPMV.388/2004 of M.A.C.T.,ERNAKULAM

¶6

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶7

E.L.ANTONY, S/O.LEINO, AGED 33 YEARS, ELAMBLASSERY HOUSE, BEACH ROAD, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE KOCHI-2, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.P.M.JOSHI

¶9

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶10

SHIJU @ ANTONY, AGED NOT KNOWN,

¶11

S/O.VARGHESE, MALIAKKAL HOUSE, KILIAMPADAMVADUTHARA

¶12

H.NO.15/1676, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE, PIN 682002. (DELETED)

¶13

JANCY RAJAN, D/O.NOT KNOWN, AGED NOT KNOWN, THEKKEPLACKAL HOUSE, 15/1676 RAMESWARAM VILLAGE-682002. (DELETED)

¶14

THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, AMBIKA ARCADE, M.G.ROAD,ERNAKULAM- 682015.

¶15

(RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 ARE DELETED FROM THE ARRAY OF PARTIES AT THE RISK OF THE PETITIONER AS PER ORDER DATD 12/9/12 IN I.A.NO.12244/12 IN MACA.712/2011)

¶16

BY ADV. SRI.P.JAYASANKAR

¶17

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

HARUN-UL-RASHID,J.

¶19

M.A.C.A.NO.612 OF 2011

¶20

DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2013

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

Claimant is the appellant. The appeal is directed against the award in O.P.(MV).No.388/2004 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam. The Tribunal allowed the claimant to recover and realise an amount of `38,625/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition. The claimant filed the original petition claiming compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the accident occurred on 18/1/2004 . The claimant was riding the motor cycle bearing Regn.No. KL-7/G 4972. The offending motor cycle driven by the lst respondent hit the backside of the claimant's motor cycle, as a result, the claimant and the pillion rider are thrown to the road and sustained serious injuries. The Tribunal marked Exts.A1 to A7 and Ext.A10 in O.P.(MV).No.388/2004 and Exts.A8 and A9 in the connected O.P.(MV).No.532/2004. Ext.A5 is the accident registercum-wound certificate, Ext.A6 is the discharge summary and Exts.A7

¶23

-2-

¶24

M.A.C.A.No.612/2011

¶25

and A10 are medical bills. The Tribunal found that respondents 1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable and the 3^rd respondent Insurance Company has to deposit the compensation. The claimant is aged 27 years at the time of accident. He was a coolie. According to him, he was earning 8,000/- per month. The Tribunal fixed the monthly income at the rate of 3,000/- and `6,000/- was awarded under the head 'loss of earning' for two months.

¶26

Considering the fact that the claimant was a coolie, this Court is of the view that the monthly income fixed by the Tribunal is not adequate and reasonable. Therefore, the monthly income is fixed as 4,000/- per month. Considering the injury sustained and considering the fact that the claimant was under treatment as an inpatient for seven days, this Court is of the view that he is entitled loss of earning for three months and hence awarded additional compensation of 6,000/- under the head 'loss of earning'.

¶27

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that no amount was paid under the head 'extra

¶28

-3-

¶29

M.A.C.A.No.612/2011

¶30

nourishment', though 5,000/- was claimed. The rejection of claim under this head is not legal. This Court is of the view that the claimant is entitled to compensation of 1,000/- under the head 'extra nourishment'. Learned counsel for the appellant also submits that the compensation of `8,000/- under the head 'loss of

¶31

amenities and enjoyment in life' is too low, which requires refixation.

¶32

Considering the evidence and the totality of circumstances, this Court is of the view that the amount awarded under the head 'loss of amenities and enjoyment in life' also requires re-fixation. Accordingly, the claimant is entitled to additional compensation of `4,000/-.

¶33

In the result the appeal is partly allowed. The award passed by the Tribunal is modified. The appellant is entitled to a total additional compensation of `11,000/- with same rate of interest from the date of petition till realisation.

¶34

HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE.

¶35

kcv.

E.L.Antony v. Shiju and Two Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

E.L.Antony v. Shiju and Two Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Phonographic Performance Limited Vs Casino Hotel - Cgh Earth

The Regional Director, Esi Corpn. Vs M/S. Arjuna Natural Extracts (P) Ltd.

National Insurance Co.Ltd., Vs James George and Others

O.T.Chackochan Vs Sri.K.G.Mohan Lal

Pullanhi Veettil Kumaran Vs the Special Tahsildar La, Kannur

Mrs.Brigit Scariachan Vs S.Theertha